"C.E. Forman" wrote:
>
> >Why? Are great games allowed to have horrible payoffs that are completely
> not
> >in the spirit of the rest of the game?
>
> It seems the ending of EotB is the only gripe you have with the game, since
> you still refer to it as a "great game" (and this despite your having just
> named it as worse than LGoP2).
I didn't name it worse than LGoP2, you did. I was telling you what I thought
some of the other "worst games ever" were. It's better than LGoP2, that's for
sure.
> Which raises a question: If an ending is actually so disappointing as to
> wreck the entire game experience, does this mean that the only reason one
> plays a game is to "beat" it and see its cool ending? Isn't the fun of
> working your way through the game considered part of the payoff? True, it
> sucks that they got cheap on the ending, but that shouldn't make the whole
> game a "bad" one.
If you don't play an RPG or adventure game to finish it, why do you play it?
Food for thought. I mean, if you didn't play it to finish it, then
construction sets like Dungeon Hack would be all that people ever bought
(unlimited gameplay, same generic payoff).
--
http://www.MobyGames.com/
The world's most comprehensive gaming database project.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to
the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect'
Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
